netdev - Re: [RFC net-next 0/6] offload linux bonding tc ingress rules

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAJ3xEMjzv_HkXvr11xKNFKETY_f0DhTx2m6AbdMBf5x6EfEUVg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 5 Mar 2018 23:43:31 +0200
From:   Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@...il.com>
To:     John Hurley <john.hurley@...ronome.com>
Cc:     Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
        Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
        Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 0/6] offload linux bonding tc ingress rules

On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 3:28 PM, John Hurley <john.hurley@...ronome.com> wrote:
> This RFC patchset adds support for offloading tc ingress rules applied to
> linux bonds. The premise of these patches is that if a rule is applied to
> a bond port then the rule should be applied to each slave of the bond.
>
> The linux bond itself registers a cb for offloading tc rules. Potential
> slave netdevs on offload devices can then register with the bond for a
> further callback - this code is basically the same as registering for an
> egress dev offload in TC. Then when a rule is offloaded to the bond, it
> can be relayed to each netdev that has registered with the bond code and
> which is a slave of the given bond.
>
> To prevent sync issues between the kernel and offload device, the linux
> bond driver is affectively locked when it has offloaded rules. i.e no new
> ports can be enslaved and no slaves can be released until the offload
> rules are removed. Similarly, if a port on a bond is deleted, the bond is
> destroyed, forcing a flush of all offloaded rules.
>
> Also included in the RFC are changes to the NFP driver to utilise the new
> code by registering NFP port representors for bond offload rules and
> modifying cookie handling to allow the relaying of a rule to multiple ports.

what is your approach for rules whose bond is their egress device
(ingress = vf port
representor)?